that the prevailing attitude on this board is that Stephanie has a kneejerk reaction of hating everything.

It seems obvious to me that everyone here has a kneejerk reaction of disagreeing with her.

After all, have you see the previews for "Mamma Mia?" I certainly have and I find it very easy to believe that it takes a rather cloying approach toward being entertaining, the plot is thin and they overuse shots of sunlight on the water.

Is it really so hard to believe that this movie isn't that good?

Not for me.

I couldn't agree more with this review — except Brosnan gets a little more slack than he deserves. Yes, he's become a better actor since Bond, but not necessarily a more discerning one. He certainly could've done better than this.

I don't know what I like more about Stephenie's reviews, that they're honest and actually get to the heart of the matter or that the comments go on for so long about how much she obviously hates films. Someone who hates film wouldn't be so passionately moved when presented with a crappy film, surely. What I see is outrage that yet another filmic insult is being shoved onto the public, which would suggest a caring about films which people who line up to see Mamma Mia — or defend it — might not appreciate.

Steve

Isn't "a cast ready to break into joyous song and dance every minute" the very definition of a musical? And as for talent, Streep, Walters, Baranski and Firth are fantastic, and the young Seyfried isn't half bad either.

This is supposed to be a FUN movie, not "Sophie's Choice 2", so everybody please lighten up. I found it utterly enjoyable, and so did most of the other viewers at the screening I attended (everybody stayed through the credits to watch the encore performances). I, for one, am glad that Streep & Co. didn't take themselves too seriously to make this movie.

As I live in the UK, where it opened last week. And Stephanie is probably right about its objective merits.

That said, however, it was the most fun I've had at the movies in a long, long time. People were dancing in the aisles at the end. Could it have been better? Probably. But it was the first time in a long time I've left a cinema feeling happier about life than when I went in.

It would make a Bazillion bucks. Next time I would advise the director to cast Batman with a large part in the production.

...so Stephanie's review ain't no surprise here. Geez, does everyone from peasant to hotel owner on this island wear festive outfits 24/7 and walk around ready to throw confetti and flowers at the drop of a hat? If a musical features a cast ready to break into joyous song and dance every minute, that's never a good sign--especially if they aren't giving you much talent or good numbers to look at.

But you're just being mean.

The Village People's one and only theatrical film. A film in which nobody comments on the concept that every member of the VP is an obviously gay stereotype. Where the VP are supposed to bring "magic" to everyone around them. Disney barely managed to do this, as farce, in Enchanted. And none of the songs in that film were as crappy as the music of ABBA.

Whoever approved this project deserves to be impeached right after Bush.

No only will I not go to see this in the theater, but will refuse to watch it on cable or regular broadcast TV (which will occur uncomfortably soon.

I can only add that several weeks ago, when my son took his 8 year old niece, my granddaughter, to the latest Indian Jones movie, they showed the trailer for "Mamma Mia!", which caused Zara to proclaim that she absolutely HAD to see it. Uncle Marc quickly quashed that, as well he should have.

This movie can't possibly not suck.

Is what kind of skank has three possible fathers for a single child?

They can do that today. They can over dub in another singer (a la Natalie Wood in West Side Story), they can add sound or play with the shape of the sound wave to make it sound "thicker", etc. Or they could have had a really good vocal coach teach him to sing from his chest and not his throat (his voice is thin because he is tensing his throat and singing from his throat.) His speaking voice is resonant, so a good teacher could have fixed this. I had a music teacher back in high school take a girl with a baby, nasally, whiny voice and in five literal minutes open up that voice to become full, rich, and without nasal whine. It's a technique, not a mystery.

I heard him on the bumper during his appearance on the daily SHow and I was shocked. Was the thinnes supposed to denote his suffering or something?

I don't get it.

I don't expect Oscar worthy performances from this. But I will say that my husband liked Hancock, (another movie panned here) as did a lot of people I know. Salon's reviewer seem a bit pretentiously critical of decent movies (The Bucket List comes to mind as an example of that pretentiousness).

I've seen the ads for this so-called movie; even without seeing it, I endorse this review. The movie looks canned, stupid and asinine-and those are the kindest words I can say about it.

That the ABBA music is in it makes it even worse. I can't imagine what they must have paid the ABBA songwriters, Benny and Bjorn, but it must have been enough for them to stop wincing every time they hear the songs mangled beyond belief.

I've heard that the stage musical is better. I can only hope so, because it has people who can sing in it. Pierce Brosnan singing? Meryl Streep dances and sings? There is a plot to it?

What a pathetic waste of money and energy. I'll keep listening to the original music and ignore what some producers think is entertainment.